Trump calls for 'war' against Mexican drug cartel 'monsters' after Americans murdered

Factually incorrect. If the firearms were part of a straw purchase, to deliberately transfer them to another individual for the purpose of avoiding a background check, the transaction was illegal. This is already covered by federal level firearm-related restrictions.

Just as it is has been explained, many times before, how the ninety percent figure is dishonest and erroneous. Just as it has been explained this murder has nothing to do with firearms trafficked in from the united states. But such facts have been ignored on the part of yourself, many times before, and will likely continue to be ignored simply because they undermine the political narrative being presented on the part of yourself.

Blame those who have confiscated firearms after they were registered, and who have vocally supported such measures.

And the registration of firearms will not serve to prevent them from being trafficked across the border into the nation of Mexico. The government will not even prosecute known felons who attempt to acquire firearms.

 

So naturally The Fake News Media slimes the victims.

THE YOUNG KIDS IN PARTICULAR WERE ASKING FOR IT: LA Times accused of ‘blaming’ Mexican cartel massacre victims by noting family’s ‘long history of violence.’

 

You just make up s,h,I,t don’t you ? It’s not a straw purchase to sell a gun in private sales to someone you know NOTHING about. As long as you don’t know it’s a straw purchase, NO ONE is guilty of any crime. An FFL dealer requires the buyer to answer the question concerning straw purchases. Private sales do not. THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT. Stop making s.h.i.t up.
No, the actual requirement to identify a straw purchaser in private sale is not covered by federal law. Private sales sellers ARE NOT COVERED BY FEDERAL LAW. Neither the seller nor the buyer are required to provide ANY INFORMATION WHATSOEVER.
Restrictions are not requirements. FFL dealers are required to identify illegal buyers, private sellers are not. That makes private sales, unenforced with no requirements.

If you are restricted to driving only with an operators license, no one would get one. The requirement to present it when asked ( read the law) by a cop is what makes it an enforceable law. Restrictions are not enforceable laws without enforcement requirements. So get real.

 

Who said anything about registering firearms ? We should register ( license) gun owners.

 

Who knows what you mean by ‘ financed” in quotes.

 

Even if the assessment on the part of yourself were factually correct, which it is not, it would still not be relevant to the discussion of the violence perpetrated by drug cartel members against citizens of the united states. What is being done on the part of yourself, is nothing less than blaming the victim to excuse the actions of the victimizers.

 

Perhaps the united states should also register individuals on the basis of wishing to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures while they are at it. Or perhaps anyone who owns an electronic device for communication on the internet.

 

Right, and gun control is not unreasonable either. You didn’t know ? Your cell phone is regulated. Nothing gets by conservatives. Like, literally everything does.

 

Shutting down the border is no contradiction, but the question is what benefit would there be (concerning the cartel violence, if you want to stop migration thats another discussion)? The cartels had to deal with such situations after 9/11. The prices for drugs exploded, some cartels did indeed go down as their usual tactics did not work any longer (Tijuana Cartel e.g.) others mastered the new challenge and became more rich than they would ever have imagined before.

If China is unable to prevent drug trade with all the harsh punishments, with all Orwell-like monitoring dont think for a minute you could cut it down ultimately. The cartels have already enough man power beyond the border, they have allies and good buiseness relationships not only to Latin American syndicates and street gangs, cartels have their ties to the five families in New York, the Chicago outfit, US prison gangs of hispanic and non-hispanic origin (Aryan brotherhood), the OMC like Hells Angels or Bandidos. Every crime syndicate in the US or Canada that controls an important harbour will do their part to keep that drug flow going.

As long as there are millions of Americans willing to spend billions on illegal drugs that flow wont stop. i you reduce it to a certain level the prices will rise. SHutting down the border and stopping the flow of people (as good as possible at all) will neither stop the flow of drugs (South-North) nor weapons (North-South) nor the cash flows.

By the way despite all the cartel violence and horrors cutting down all profitable trade with Mexico and Middle America is a high stake, maybe too high.

 

But it'k an ok strategy for the WH?

Give you credit, you magats own your hypocrisy 100%

 

Shut down the border ? The last time Trump suggested that, all the republicans started to shake and the stock market took a hit. Go ahead. But don’t forget to shut down all the boat traffic and POEs accross the entire nation where 90% of the drug’s enter. Let’s just make believe there are quick easy solutions. Let’s just invade Iraq again.

 

Paranoia, cowardice and fear make people do odd and unamerican things

 

For sure !

 

Thanks for agreeing.

 

whos going to supply wall street and congress with the tonnes of cocaine they snort yearly if you shut down The Cartel?

 

Does one need a license to possess and operate a cellphone in the united states, especially in a public venue?

 

The term "financed" was from your post. What did you mean when you used it?

 

I had forgotten the vastness of the scope of what the overall drug "network" must be by now. Ultimately, you are right. My proposed 'Pollyannaish' solution is, to say the least, inadequate.

Actually, it is far less stressful and irritating to simply see what's coming through the 'lens' of what's already here and just forget about it! We are a nation in a state of irremediable decline and decay; in retrospect, our national 'disease' set in with the Vietnam War.

Now, approximately half the population already are drug-addicts, and/or mindless parasites who cannot even earn a living without a smorgasbord of government welfare programs. A second "Dark Ages" is looming, and not myself, people like me, Donald Trump, or anybody else in the United States is going to stop it....

Still, I seriously doubt that if drugs/decay/hopelessness grow to the same dangerous threshold in China or Russia that the governments of those countries will tolerate it! Time will tell....

 

No one has a clue what you are going on about and it's suspected by some that you do not either.

 

For what purpose?

 

To keep conservatives whining and whimpering about their inability to sell their guns in private sales to criminals.

 

You said, financed the USG. I said, finance the the politicians. Never said the USG. That was your canard,

 

You are misquoting yourself. Check again.

 

Why don’t you quote me accurately ?
“The American Govt. has it’s own element of corruptness as financed by the nra.....they can’t prevent arming the drug cartel of Mexico and criminals throughout America.”
That’s the election process. The nra donated a total 30 million to Trump campaign.

 

Actually, there appears to be a tension between the Welfare State and the Immigration State, and some of the same steps that will slow drug trafficking will slow human trafficking.

How the Welfare State Undermines Support for Immigration. Want more support for open immigration? Chop back on the welfare state.

“It’s not just a controversy in the United States. Taxpayers in the Netherlands, for instance, are becoming less tolerant of immigrants who want handouts rather than work.”​

Many people have a “what’s in it for us” attitude.

They like the underlying concept of programs such as the EB-5 visa that attract immigrants with money, and they are broadly sympathetic to immigrants with skills and education. They want immigrants who won’t rely on handouts and they like immigrants who will increase the nation’s per-capita GDP.



They’re skeptical of mass immigration by people with low incomes. They fear such migrants will impose higher costs on taxpayers, though business audiences are more sympathetic to mass migration because labor costs will fall.

Poor people from poor nations will migrate to rich nations for handouts rather than for economic opportunity.

The Trump administration announced long-awaited “public charge” immigration regulations this week, and the furor immediately kicked up to derangement level. …But immigration regulation of this sort has been a part of our laws for more than a century.

The 1882 act declared that “any convict, lunatic, idiot, or any person unable to take care of himself or herself without becoming a public charge…shall not be permitted to land.”

The 1952 revisions to immigration law maintained the idea that the government may exclude “paupers, professional beggars, or vagrants” and those who are “are likely at any time to become public charges.”

In 1996, Congress strengthened the public charge provisions. Why would anyone call the Trump administration’s interpretation “un-American?”

The regulations—which do not apply to refugees, asylum-seekers, and various other groups—propose guidance to determine if an immigrant would be likely to use the welfare system for more than 12 months during a three-year period.

Taxpayers in many nations are worried about that possibility and are not very welcoming to immigrants who will collect benefits.



These cartel members were holding Americans hostage. The Mexican government quickly found and released them, knowing full well that Trump could find them and could be expected to rescue them, regardless of where that rescue needed to take place.